In the previous discussion, Derek Jarvis asks about the “side issue” I mention there, concerning the relationship between religious thought and politics. I’ve been scowling at my computer, trying to decide if I want to go there; it is going to get messy, and very likely in a way I won’t enjoy. On the other hand, it is a valid question, and it was a little unfair of me to bring it up and then ask people not to talk about it.
So I’ll make this as concise as I can, then dive into the nearest foxhole.
Some believe that science and religion have separate “spheres” and can comfortably co-exist. I do not; I believe the methods are in conflict, even if, at a given point, an individual may be unaware of the conflict. I further believe that scientific analysis is the only way to understand society well enough to consciously change it, and that conscious change is objectively necessary.
Another aspect can be expressed by example. The Eighth Commandment forbids stealing. I believe the only way to save civilization will require at some point (at some not very distant point) that we expropriate the means of production. As Engels said, expropriate is another word for steal. Someone who believes in the Eighth Commandment, when faced with that sort of crisis, must make the choice between rejecting an element of theological principle, and rejecting a social necessity. I make no claims about which way a given person will jump; only that the choice will be there.
Does that help clarify matters?